The One Cause of Poverty That’s Never Considered

[Revoltingest]

Did you read the linked article in post #1?

No. I did peruse the quoted portions, but they
dint address the claim. (Life has been interfering
with my attention here.) Summarize in your
own words?

 

[Revoltingest]

That may be true, but I neither support Hillary nor Trump. I may decide to write in Jimmy Carter next year. He'll by 100 years old by then.

Well, when you said "new government", the only
way it would be new & different from what we
have is if Trump has a successful coup.
Otherwise, it's the same old same old.

We get what we deserve, in more ways than one.

We get what what the majority deserves.

 

[Revoltingest]

Depends on how you define "profit" (or "winning").

If your goal in life is to have more than others (and the more "more", the better) than it is a win if you can cause the others to have less - even if you have less but less less than the others.

That isn't profiting from the poor.
Moreover, I don't believe that anyone enjoys
wealth because there are poor people.
Wealth & its trappings are their own reward.

If you don't care about how much the others have as long as you have more tomorrow than you had yesterday, you'll "profit" from an overall increase in cheap goods and services.

That's a mischievous use of the word "profit".
Is that all ya gots?
Just mis-use of the word to make a point that's bogus?

 

[Revoltingest]

The capitalists love to blame the government that they, themselves, have corrupted, for that corruption. It keeps the government weak, and therefor easy for them to control, and gives the masses someone to blame for their exploitation besides the real culprits: the capitalists, themselves.

Bless your heart.

 

[Stevicus]

Well, when you said "new government", the only
way it would be new & different from what we
have is if Trump has a successful coup.
Otherwise, it's the same old same old.

Interesting that you consider the only two options to be a Trump coup or the same old same old. What about an anarcho-syndicalist commune, where everyone takes turns to be a sort of executive officer for the week?

We get what what the majority deserves.

Still works out the same.

 

[Jimmy]

It's normal when anything is computerized and even agriculture is highly mechanized. Not to mention factories. Same thing before all that too though.

 

[wellwisher]

One of the problems is poverty is a relative concept, like being rich. If you had $1million dollars, you would feel rich among the poor and middle class, but feel poor among the billionaires. Your nice home may be the envy of your middle class neighbors, but it would look like the guest house of a Billionaire. Your money would not seem to be enough, to feel rich, in a richer neighborhood. You may even get pity, for only having one $million. Nobody wants pity for such things.

I few years back, a study was done to take inventory of the material things owned by the majority of poor in America. Are you aware that the American poor have more square footage of living space, than the middle class in Europe? They own at least one automobile, have computers, internet, cable TV, cell phones, microwaves, etc. The poor of today have things the middle class, of 30 years ago, did not even have. They would be happy 30 year ago, due to their tangible wealth.

Poor is not just about satisfying practical needs, but about comparing oneself to the Jones. One may have a used car and not a new BMW. One may have a cell phone, but not the latest iPhone. One may have 2000 square feet of living space, but not in the best neighborhood. The poor and rich do not count their blessings on an absolute scale, but a relative scale. Both are not satisfied, so even the rich want more.

I was trained as a Chemical Engineer who had a good paying job; upper middle class. I gave that up 30 years ago, to become poor. Poor, I felt was a state of mind, and I wanted to find happiness and a sense of self, without relative material prosthesis. I learned to manage with less and enjoy the best things of life that were free or cheap; nice sunset or a swim in the pond. I can now cheer the success of those who do well. Jesus blessed the poor, so they would not feel sorry and discontent with their life, since one could perfect themselves easier, via simplicity.

Mass media, in an attempt to sell merchandise, builds up things that cost money, to make money. This sales pitch is hard to get away from, and is often is what makes people compare themselves, and lose that joy that simple living can bring. The small child can display their happiness, even in the poorest house, since their joy comes from inside. Joy from material things is a fickle god, since all merchandise wears out, and so does the external joy buzz. Inside is more enduring and is free.

 

[metis]

Why is that a bad thing?

For a variety of reasons since income disparity is a major cause of discontent and instability within any society as we tend to compare ourselves with those around us. Also, it feeds the "money is everything" atmosphere more leading to materialism and even hedonism.

There's only so much money in any given economy, thus if some have tons of it that means others have less. It also tends to lead towards more arrogance for those on top who often see themselves as being very special and needing privilege that others cannot possibly have. And in a democracy, it can threaten the entire system as we've seen so many times throughout history, including here in the States.

The 2 richest don't agree on political issues so if they were buying votes, they would cancel each other out by buying opposing politicians.

Why should they have so much influence in a democracy??? Just take a look at the billions spent each election year for lobbying efforts by those with lotsa $. Can you spend that much? If not, then you participation with "one person, one vote" is much more limited, and that can endanger any republic, such as we've seen so often with "banana republics".

 

[PureX]

One of the problems is poverty is a relative concept, like being rich. If you had $1million dollars, you would feel rich among the poor and middle class, but feel poor among the billionaires. Your nice home may be the envy of your middle class neighbors, but it would look like the guest house of a Billionaire. Your money would not seem to be enough, to feel rich, in a richer neighborhood. You may even get pity, for only having one $million. Nobody wants pity for such things.

I few years back, a study was done to take inventory of the material things owned by the majority of poor in America. Are you aware that the American poor have more square footage of living space, than the middle class in Europe? They own at least one automobile, have computers, internet, cable TV, cell phones, microwaves, etc. The poor of today have things the middle class, of 30 years ago, did not even have. They would be happy 30 year ago, due to their tangible wealth.

Poor is not just about satisfying practical needs, but about comparing oneself to the Jones. One may have a used car and not a new BMW. One may have a cell phone, but not the latest iPhone. One may have 2000 square feet of living space, but not in the best neighborhood. The poor and rich do not count their blessings on an absolute scale, but a relative scale. Both are not satisfied, so even the rich want more.

I was trained as a Chemical Engineer who had a good paying job; upper middle class. I gave that up 30 years ago, to become poor. Poor, I felt was a state of mind, and I wanted to find happiness and a sense of self, without relative material prosthesis. I learned to manage with less and enjoy the best things of life that were free or cheap; nice sunset or a swim in the pond. I can now cheer the success of those who do well. Jesus blessed the poor, so they would not feel sorry and discontent with their life, since one could perfect themselves easier, via simplicity.

Mass media, in an attempt to sell merchandise, builds up things that cost money, to make money. This sales pitch is hard to get away from, and is often is what makes people compare themselves, and lose that joy that simple living can bring. The small child can display their happiness, even in the poorest house, since their joy comes from inside. Joy from material things is a fickle god, since all merchandise wears out, and so does the external joy buzz. Inside is more enduring and is free.

Poverty isn't defined by a lack of money, or a lack of material things. It's defined by a lack of opportunity, and therefor, a lack of hope. Poverty is powerlessness. Poverty is the inability to control one's own destiny as they wish because it's being controlled by someone or something else.

It doesn't matter that the poor in the U.S. have a big screen tv or a smart phone because those things are not what defines being wealthy. What defines being wealthy is the ability to control one's own destiny to the degree that it's possble. It's having the means to deal with whatever misfortunes are likely to befall us, and to take advantage of whatever opportunities might come our way.

It was never money that we humans were fighting and dying for. It was the ability to control our own destiny by being able to control everything and everyone around us. Wealth is the ability to do that, while poverty is the lack of that ability. And deep poverty is the loss of hope that one will EVER have that control.

 

[Kfox]

Effects of economic inequality - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The problem with your Wikipedia link is it address income inequality on a global scale; I was referring to what has been happening in the USA only.
It has been my observation that lately income inequality has been a good thing in the United States because I don’t care about the rich, I care about the poor. I consider it a good thing when the middle income; and especially the poor are better off regardless of what this does for the rich.
Remember the Dot-Com boom of the mid to late 1990’s? When computers became mainstream (among other things) and the economy grew by leaps and bounds? Well the vast majority of that wealth created went to the rich, a much smaller percentage of that wealth went to the middle income, and the poor were benefited just a trickle. At this point income inequality (the gap between the rich and the poor) was at it’s greatest ever. Then when the economy crashed around 2007, the rich lost billions, the middle income lost thousands, and the poor lost a trickle (because they didn’t have much to lose). At this point the income inequality was lessened. Then when Trump got elected and introduced his version of Trickle-Down economics, the economy grew by leaps and bounds again and the super rich got their billions back (and then some), the middle income got their thousands back, and the poor got their trickle back, and at this time the gap between the rich and the poor expanded to record levels again. So if you only care about what happens to the poor, the question becomes; were the poor better off with their trickle or without it? I believe the poor were better off with their trickle even if it means billions for the rich. This seem to only happen during economic expansion which is when the gap between the rich and the poor is at it’s greatest.

 

[Lyndon]

Economic boom under Trump presidency, are you living in an alternative universe??

 

[Kfox]

But they can influence the Overton window.

As does the middle income and poor thanks to social media.

 

[metis]

The problem with your Wikipedia link is it address income inequality on a global scale; I was referring to what has been happening in the USA only.

But it affects us as well. For just one example, roughly 30% of our children here in the States are "food challenged", often only getting their only nutritious meal at school. During the pandemic, hurt like this increased. Many are homeless. A great many cannot afford long term healthcare. Innercity schools are often in various degrees of shambles, and it's almost impossible for so many families to provide their kids with post-high school educations. Etc., Etc., Etc...

 

[metis]

This seem to only happen during economic expansion which is when the gap between the rich and the poor is at it’s greatest.

This expansion began with Obama and continued through Trump and is continuing with Biden. We now have the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years.

The difference is that under Trump the deficit went up the highest amount in our history as his tax break was unpaid for at the tune of almost $2 trillion.

 

[Kfox]

For a variety of reasons since income disparity is a major cause of discontent and instability within any society as we tend to compare ourselves with those around us.

Yes there is a lot of jealousy by those who have less, rather than being happy they have more, they are unhappy because the other guy got a lot more. This is more of a jealousy problem than an economic one.

There's only so much money in any given economy, thus if some have tons of it that means others have less.

Absurd. I can’t believe there are still people in the real world who still believe this. The US economy is NOT based on a zero/sum game, it is constructed in a way that there is unlimited potential for growth. The reason we got off the Gold standard is because there is only a limited amount of gold in existence, but there is an unlimited amount of wealth to be created in the USA. If you disagree, I challenge you to point to a specific incident (sometime this century) where the rich got richer at the expense of the poor.

Why should they have so much influence in a democracy???

How have Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos influenced democracy?

Just take a look at the billions spent each election year for lobbying efforts by those with lotsa $. Can you spend that much?

Most Political Action Committees (PAC’s) influence for the benefit of the middle income and the poor.

 

[Kfox]

Economic boom under Trump presidency, are you living in an alternative universe??

The Stock Market was at record high, and Unemployment was near record low under Trump. The poor, and minority business did very well under his administration as well.

 

[metis]

Yes there is a lot of jealousy by those who have less, rather than being happy they have more, they are unhappy because the other guy got a lot more. This is more of a jealousy problem than an economic one.

Absurd. I can’t believe there are still people in the real world who still believe this. The US economy is NOT based on a zero/sum game, it is constructed in a way that there is unlimited potential for growth. The reason we got off the Gold standard is because there is only a limited amount of gold in existence, but there is an unlimited amount of wealth to be created in the USA. If you disagree, I challenge you to point to a specific incident (sometime this century) where the rich got richer at the expense of the poor.

How have Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos influenced democracy?

Most Political Action Committees (PAC’s) influence for the benefit of the middle income and the poor.

You seriously don't have a clue of how macro-economics works. As anthropologists, we study societies all over the world, past and present. We know what income disparity can do to a society as it has happened so many times in the past.

Sorry, but I'm not going to waste my time with your ignorance of the subject because I don't think you'd ever agree with the reality of the negative effects of income disparity. Maybe consider what reducing this ill can do by actually studying the Nordic Model where it has successfully been done: Nordic model - Wikipedia

I got you one source, so maybe start there.

 

[Nakosis]

But it doesn't occur to you that you pay so much because the rich pay so little?

No, not really. I don't see a benefit in seeing myself as a victim of someone else's actions.
I rather examine what I'm doing wrong and figure out how I can do better myself than blame others for my problems.
Not something I can change or care to.

 

[metis]

How have Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos influenced democracy?

Just for the record: Elon Musk's SpaceX has spent nearly $1.8 million on political lobbying this year, CNBC first reported. Meanwhile, Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin has spent just under $1.4 million, data from Open Secrets shows.-- Elon Musk's SpaceX has spent nearly $1.8 million on political lobbying this year, more than Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin.

 

[Kfox]

But it affects us as well. For just one example, roughly 30% of our children here in the States are "food challenged", often only getting their only nutritious meal at school. During the pandemic, hurt like this increased. Many are homeless. A great many cannot afford long term healthcare. Innercity schools are often in various degrees of shambles, and it's almost impossible for so many families to provide their kids with post-high school educations. Etc., Etc., Etc...

It was even worse during the great recession of 2007 when economic inequality was less than it is now.

This expansion began with Obama and continued through Trump and is continuing with Biden. We now have the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years.

Yes! Under Obama, we sunk to the worse recession since the Depression and began coming out of it. Under Trump things grew to record levels, then when the pandemic hit, the economy crashed and went from record highs to record lows; only to start coming back after the pandemic ended. It is coming back, but not quite where it was before the crash.

The difference is that under Trump the deficit went up the highest amount in our history as his tax break was unpaid for at the tune of almost $2 trillion.

The deficit is higher now than it was under Trump. Every President brings the Deficit to record levels; it happened under Bush, Obama, Trump, and now even Biden.